Contrary Opinions from Prominent SDA Men Refuting a Wednesday Crucifixion

Joe Crews / Doug Batchelor
Samuele Bacchiocchi
Webmaster's Comments

On this page you will find a wonderful message by my favorite preacher Joe Crews. This man amply proves that the so called "Wednesday Crucifixion"is nothing more than a Cruci-FICTION designed t deceive the masses! I don't usually place other's people work on my site as many of you already know. However, I do believe this to be one blessed preacher man! I would not think that I could write a better expose' on a topic such as this, therefore, I pray you are blessed as I was blessed by reading it. Jesus was NOT crucified on Wednesday as some claim, and Joe Crews proves this quite niecly here. Please pray before reading this so as to allow your heart to be cut with the Truth held therein.

For those of you that want a "quick" and to the point reponse to this doctrine of demons. Use this...

In John 19:31 we have all the evidence we need. It says, "The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away."

They claim, that Christ died on Wednesday, and therefore, John 19:31 would mean the following "Thursday" was this high Sabbath day. Problem is, that is NOT the Biblical definition of a high Sabbath day. A high Sabbath occurred when a feast day (In this case it was the Feast of Unleavened Bread) fell on the 7th day weekly Sabbath. Since the Seventh Day is already considered a Sabbath, and the feast days are considered "annual" Sabbaths, (See Lev. 23:23-38) when they fell on the same day, that day would then be considered a HIGH Sabbath day. A "Thursday" or "5th day" of the week would NEVER be considerd a High Sabbath. That is an absolute impossiblity.

PLUS.. notice this, in Luke 23:56 it states the woman did not prepare the body of Jesus on Friday because they, "...rested the sabbath day according to the commandment." Biblical FACT is, the Commandments speak of the Seventh Day Sabbath, not the annual feast day sabbaths.

PLUS, Christ was put to death on the "preparation day," of the week and the preparation day was never on a Wednesday. In all the pages of biblical history, as well as biblical jurisprudence, the preparation day has always been and will always continue to be Friday. This is graphically confirmed in Mark 15:42-43 where is states, "And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea, an honourable counsellor, which also waited for the kingdom of God, came, and went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus."

OR... you can use this...

" Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene." Mark 16:9

I implore you to read the following sermon by Joe Crews. It will bless you immensely in your knoweldge of this Bible truth. Learn from it and share with those loved ones that are being attacked by the master deceiver. He goes into great depth about this so that you will have all you need to combat this decpetion.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Webmaster Note: The views shared below were/are jointly held by Joe Crews and Doug Batchelor of AmazingFacts.org

Three Days and Three Nights

by Joe Crews

Some of the strongest and most controversial opinions have built up around the statement of Jesus concerning Jonah and the whale. Strangely enough, the chief issue has nothing at all to do with the oft-challenged fact of a man being swallowed by a sea monster. The decisive point for many revolves around the length of time Jonah spent in the stomach of the whale. Here are the exact words Jesus used in describing the experience of the runaway prophet: "An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here." Matthew 12:39-41.

Now this statement of Jesus is significant in more ways than one. In the first place, it positively affirms that the Old Testament story of Jonah did actually take place as the Scriptures record it. But more than that, the event constituted a sign of Christ's own death, and burial, and resurrection. Jesus referred to the preaching of Jonah on two other occasions as a sign to the unbelieving Pharisees.

Today there is a vocal minority of Christians who have made a tremendous issue out of the phrase "three days and three nights." They insist that Jesus used the expression because He was to be in the grave exactly seventy-two hours, not a second more or second less. This conviction has led them to conclude that Christ was crucified on Wednesday afternoon and was resurrected at the same hour late Sabbath afternoon. In this way they account for the full seventy-two hours which they believe Christ spent in the tomb.

Does this interpretation harmonize with the full Bible record on the subject? Does it fit with the many other inspired accounts of the time element involved? Is there other information given in the Word of God which will make it clear exactly how the three days and three nights are to be understood?

Fortunately, we have an abundance of Bible evidence to answer these questions. In fact, on seventeen separate occasions Jesus or His friends spoke of the timetable involving His death and resurrection. Ten times it was specified that the resurrection would take place on the "third day." On five occasions they said, "in" or "within three days." Twice they used the term, "after three days," and one time only Jesus spoke of His death as "three days and three nights."

Without question all of these various expressions are used to describe the very same event. There seems to be no controversy regarding this point. "The third day," "in three days," "after three days," and "three days and three nights" are equivalent terms used in the Bible in reference to the resurrection of Jesus.

Expressions Cannot Be Literal

Now we ask the question: Can all of these expressions be taken in a strictly literal sense and still harmonize with each other? Absolutely not! For example, "after three days" would certainly have to be interpreted as longer than seventy-two hours. "Within three days" could mean anytime less than seventy-two hours, and "three days and three nights" could only mean exactly seventy-two hours to the second. And "the third day" presents even greater problems as we shall notice in a moment.

Does this sound terribly confusing? If so, it is only because men have placed their own interpretation upon the meaning of God's Word. We must let the Bible explain itself, and especially, we must let Christ provide definitions for the words which He spoke. It would be a mammoth mistake to seize upon any one of the expressions used and force its strict compliance with our interpretation without reference to the other sixteen texts on the subject.

Is it possible for all these texts to be explained so that they will not contradict each other? If they cannot be harmonized, then Jesus Himself was guilty of compounding the confusion, because He used all of the expressions at different times in speaking of His death and resurrection. In Matthew 12:40 He said, "three days and three nights," but in Mark 8:31 He said, "after three days." He referred to the same event in John 2:19 as "in three days," and on five occasions He said, "the third day." Matthew 16:21; 17:23; 20:19; Luke 13:32; 24:46.

Inclusive Reckoning

The only way we can harmonize all of these apparently contradictory statements of Jesus is to understand them in the light of inclusive reckoning of time. This was the method used throughout the Bible in computing time, and we must apply the same method now, unless we want mass confusion. The unreasonable insistence upon the use of twentieth century English idioms of speech to interpret first century Greek or Hebrew has led to some extreme views indeed. Jesus and His friends spoke and wrote in harmony with the common literacy usage of the day, and that usage recognized inclusive reckoning of time. In simple language, this means that any part of a day was counted as a whole day.

Before we turn to the Bible for confirmation of this principle, let us read the authoritative statement of the Jewish Encyclopedia on the matter. "A short time in the morning of the seventh day is counted as the seventh day; circumcision takes place on the eighth day, even though, of the first day only a few minutes after the birth of the child, these being counted as one day." Vol. 4, p. 475. How clearly this defines the Hebrew method of computing time. Any small part of a day was reckoned as the entire twenty-four hour period. It is the Hebrew form of speech and language. Scores of contradictions would appear in both Old and New Testament if this principle were ignored. We must compare Scripture with Scripture and use the idiom of the language in which the Bible was written. Inclusive reckoning was taken for granted by all writers of the Scripture.

Let us now notice a few examples of this usage in the Bible that will clarify the problem before us. In Genesis 7:4 God said to Noah, "For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth." But in verse 10 we read, "And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth." The marginal reading expresses it as "on the seventh day." Pity the poor chronologer who tries to figure that one out. When did the flood come? In seven days? On the seventh day? Or after seven days? The answer is simple when inclusive reckoning is applied. The day on which God spoke to Noah counted as the first day, and the day on which it started raining was the seventh day. Even if God spoke just ten minutes before the end of that first day, it was still counted as one of the seven. And if it started raining at noon on the last day, it was also counted one of the seven. The same principle is revealed in the circumcision of babies. Genesis 17:12 specifies "he that is eight days old." But Luke 1:59 reads "on the eighth day." Luke 2:21 uses still another expression: "When eight days were accomplished."

Further proof for inclusive reckoning is seen in Joseph's dealing with his brethren. "He put them all together into ward three days. And Joseph said unto them the third day, This do, and live; ... go ye. ..." Genesis 42:17-19. Consider also the tax issue between King Rehoboam and the people. "Come again unto me after three days. ... So ... all the people came to Rehoboam on the third day." 2 Chronicles 10:5, 12.

These examples are only a few of the many which could be cited to establish this important point. The Hebrew usage requires only that some part of each of the days should be involved in the time period.

The Third Day

Now we are ready to apply this clearly established rule to the time Jesus was in the tomb. At least a part of three days had to be included in the period He was actually dead. The most frequent expression Jesus used in describing the resurrection was the "third day." He defended His repetition of the term on the basis of the Scriptures. "And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus is behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day." Luke 24:46.

The two disciples on the road to Emmaus employed the same expression when they spoke of the terrible events surrounding the crucifixion. Unconscious of the fact that they were talking to Jesus, who had been resurrected earlier that same day, one of them said, "To day is the third day since these things were done." Luke 24:21.

Clearly, those people understood how to count the days and to determine which was the third one. They knew because it was a common idiom of their language. But Jesus did not leave any question in the matter. It almost seems that He anticipated the perplexity of later Christians who might not know about inclusive reckoning. Therefore, He gave such a plain, conclusive explanation of how to locate the third day that no one would ever need to doubt again. "Behold, I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and the third day I shall be perfected. Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and the day following." Luke 13:32, 33.

How simple Jesus made it! Even a child can figure when the third day comes. The third day will always be the day after "to morrow" from any certain event. The first day is counted in its entirety, the whole of the second day, and the third day in its entirety.

Now we can understand the conversation Jesus had with the Jewish leaders and why they interpreted it as they did. He said, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." John 2:19-21. Later, after the crucifixion, the chief priest said to Pilate, "Sir, we remember that that deceiver said, while he was yet alive, After three days I will rise again. Command therefore that the sepulchre be made sure until the third day, lest his disciples come by night and steal him away." Matthew 27:63, 64.

With Christ's definition of time before us, the picture snaps into clear focus. Speaking prophetically of His own death and resurrection, He said, "To day (crucifixion) and to morrow (in tomb), and the third day I shall be perfected (resurrection)." There are all three days in their sequence. Even though He died in the late afternoon, the entire day would be counted as the first day. The second day would span the Sabbath when He slept in the tomb. Even though He was resurrected in the early hours on the third day, inclusive reckoning would make it one of the three days.

The Resurrection on Sunday

Now the time has come to pinpoint the actual days of the week when these events took place. Again, we are amazed at the perfect harmony of the Scriptures on the subject. There can be no question but that He arose on Sunday, the first day of the week. Mark emphatically states, "Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene." Mark 16:9. Sunday is the first day of the week, and that is when He was resurrected. Words could be no plainer. Even the original Greek construction of the text will allow no other meaning. He did not rise from the grave on Saturday, as some contend. Neither was He crucified on Wednesday. There is not a scintilla of Bible evidence that He died on the fourth day of the week.

According to the inspired record, Christ was put to death on the "preparation day," and the preparation day was not Wednesday. In all the pages of biblical history, the preparation day has been Friday. Please read Mark 15:42, 43, "And now when the even was come, because it was the preparation, that is, the day before the sabbath, Joseph of Arimathaea ... went in boldly unto Pilate, and craved the body of Jesus."

Some might question whether this could be one of the ceremonial yearly sabbaths of the ordinance system. Notice these words, "The Jews therefore, because it was the preparation, that the bodies should not remain upon the cross on the sabbath day, (for that sabbath day was an high day,) besought Pilate that their legs might be broken, and that they might be taken away." John 19:31.

The day following the crucifixion was not only the weekly seventh-day Sabbath, but it was a high Sabbath. This means that a yearly Sabbath in that particular year happened to fall on the weekly Sabbath. In this case it was the Feast of Unleavened Bread. Luke clearly identified that preparation day as the one immediately preceding the weekly Sabbath. "And that day was the preparation, and the sabbath drew on. And the women also, which came with him from Galilee, followed after, and beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid. And they returned, and prepared spices and ointments; and rested the sabbath day according to the commandment. Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared." Luke 23:54-24:1.

Surely there can be no question as to the time elements involved. He died on the preparation day, or the day before the weekly Sabbath. The next day is designated as "the sabbath according to the commandment." Since the commandment says, "The seventh day is the sabbath," we know that this had to be the day we call Saturday. Furthermore, after describing the events of the preparation day in verse 55 and the Sabbath day in verse 56, the very next verse says, "Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, bringing the spices which they had prepared." Luke 24:1.

Please take note that after preparing the spices on the afternoon of the crucifixion (Friday), and resting over the Sabbath (Saturday), they came to the tomb with the spices on the first day of the week (Sunday) to do the work of anointing. This was their first opportunity after the Sabbath to carry out the preparations made on Friday afternoon. This is when they discovered that Christ was risen.

If the crucifixion took place on Wednesday, how can we explain why the women waited until Sunday to come to the sepulchre? Why didn't they come Thursday or Friday to anoint His body? Did they not understand that after four days His body would be decomposing and their work of love would be in vain? The answers to these questions constitute the strongest case against a Wednesday crucifixion.

The Bible, in fact, offers incontestable proof that no one would have attempted such an anointing under those circumstances. When Lazarus had been dead four days, Jesus ordered the stone removed from his tomb. Martha, the sister of Lazarus, protested in these words, "Lord, by this time he stinketh: for he hath been dead four days." John 11:39.

These words of Martha reveal the fact that no woman of that day would have considered it possible to prepare a body for burial four days after death. To Martha it seemed an irrational act even to open the tomb of Lazarus. To the other women who prepared the spices it would have been equally unreasonable to enter Christ's sepulchre four days after He had been crucified.

In view of the amazing weight of biblical evidence to the contrary, how can some still cling to the Wednesday crucifixion idea? The entire scheme is based upon the twisted interpretation of a single Bible text. The "three days and three nights" phrase is forced into artificial conformity with current English forms of speech, instead of the common usage of the people living at that time.

Those who believe that Jesus died on Wednesday and rose on Saturday base much of their evidence on Matthew 28:1: "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre."

Figuring that the first day of the week "dawns" at sundown Saturday night as the Sabbath ends, these people assume that the women discovered the empty tomb in the twilight moments of the Sabbath, just before sundown. They count backwards exactly seventy-two hours and arrive at Wednesday evening just before sundown for the crucifixion.

Is this a valid conclusion? Or is there evidence that the women could not have visited the empty tomb on Saturday evening? There is indeed positive biblical proof that they did not. We find that evidence in Mark's account of the visit to the sepulchre: "And when the sabbath was past, Mary Magdalene, and Mary the mother of James, and Salome, had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him. And very early in the morning the first day of the week, they came unto the sepulchre at the rising of the sun. And they said among themselves, Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?" Mark 16:1-3.

There is no question about this being an early Sunday morning visit. It is at sunrise. The very same women are named as in Matthew's account. Can we correctly assume that these same women had been to the tomb the night before and found Jesus risen? Impossible. Why? Because of the question they asked as they approached the garden on Sunday morning, "Who shall roll us away the stone from the door of the sepulchre?" If they had been there Saturday just before sundown and found the tomb empty, they would have known that the stone was already rolled away from the door. This is absolute proof that they had not been to an empty tomb the day before.

It also proves that Matthew's "dawn" refers to the dawning represented by the sunrise and not sunset. There is no contradiction between the two accounts.

Seventy-Two Hours Not Biblical

Those who insist that Christ was in the grave a full seventy-two hours contend that the three days and three nights must be taken in the fullest literal sense. But such a contention is absolutely contrary to the testimony of the Scriptures. An example of the way the Bible uses the term is found in Esther 4:16. We read these words of Queen Esther to Mordecai: "Go, gather together all the Jews that are present in Shushan, and fast ye for me, and neither eat nor drink three days, night or day: I also and my maidens will fast likewise." Esther 4:16. Do not overlook the fact that they were to fast three days and three nights. Yet almost the next verse tells us, "Now it came to pass on the third day, that Esther put on her royal apparel, and stood in the inner court." Esther 5:1. Here is a perfect example of how three days and three nights terminate on the third day!

We have already learned how Jesus explained the third day. He said "to day, and to morrow, and the third day." Luke 13:32. Please think for a moment! When Jesus walked with the two disciples on the road to Emmaus on Sunday afternoon, after the resurrection, Cleopas said, "To day is the third day since these things were done." Luke 24:21.

No one denies that this was on Sunday. But listen, if Jesus had been crucified on Wednesday afternoon, Cleopas would have had to say "To day is the fifth day since these things were done." Count it for yourself - Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and most of Sunday! Later the same day - the first day of the week - Jesus made this statement: "Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day." Luke 24:46. Who was right? Jesus was right and Cleopas was right! But those who claim the Wednesday crucifixion are wrong. Christ died on Friday, the preparation for the Sabbath - that was the first day. He rested in the tomb on the Sabbath according to the commandment - that was the second day. He arose on the first day of the week which was Sunday - that was the third day! How simple!

The proponents of a Wednesday crucifixion use a devious argument to explain away the words of Cleopas on the road to Emmaus. They contend that he was not counting the three days from the time of Christ's death, but rather from the sealing of the tomb by the Roman authorities the day after he was crucified. For this theoretical conjecture there is not a fragment of evidence in the Bible. Cleopas did speak about the trial of Jesus and certain events leading up to His crucifixion. By taking a bit of exegetical license one could possibly reach back to those events from which to reckon the third day. But by no stretch of the imagination could any point beyond the death of Christ be used in computing the three days.

In every related text the third day is counted from the time of His death on the cross.

Matthew said He would "be killed, and be raised again the third day." Matthew 16:21. Mark wrote that He must "be killed, and after three days rise again." Mark 8:31. Luke's account reports that He must "be slain, and be raised the third day." Luke 9:22.

Repeatedly, the Scriptures emphasize the death of Jesus as the starting point of the three days. To begin counting a full day after the crucifixion is not only unbiblical but grossly imaginary. The sealing of the tomb is never once referred to in connection with the period of time He was dead.

The expression "three days and three nights" does not indicate a precise computation of hours, minutes, seconds. We read that "forty days and forty nights" were spent by Christ in the wilderness of temptation. However, the writers of two of the gospels state it simply as a period of "forty days," showing that inspiration was not pinpointing the hours or minutes.

The Four Days of Cornelius

Now let us consider a final clear-cut example of inclusive reckoning that should lay this point to rest with every open-minded reader. It is taken from the New Testament and reveals graphically how days were numbered in the days of Jesus. In Acts 10:3 Cornelius "saw in a vision evidently about the ninth hour of the day an angel of God coming in to him."

Follow the story carefully now. He was instructed in the vision to send men to Joppa and call for Peter. "And when the angel which spake unto Cornelius was departed, he called two of his household servants, and ... he sent them to Joppa. On the morrow, as they went on their journey, and drew nigh unto the city, Peter went up on the housetop to pray." Verse 7-9. While praying he had a vision, and the men knocked at his door when his vision ended. Verse 17. Please notice that this is one day after Cornelius received his angel visitor.

Peter invited the men to come in. He "lodged them. And on the morrow Peter went away with them, and certain brethren from Joppa accompanied him." Verse 23. Take note that this is now the second day since the men were dispatched by Cornelius. "And the morrow after they entered into Caesarea. And Cornelius waited for them." Verse 24. This is the third day since Cornelius had his angelic vision. But don't miss this point - a few minutes later, in talking to Peter, Cornelius said, "Four days ago I was fasting until this hour; and at the ninth hour I prayed in my house, and, behold, a man stood before me in bright clothing." Verse 30.

Now we get the picture in mind - it had been exactly three days, to the very hour. Yet Cornelius said, "Four days ago." How could he say it was four days when it was only three days? Because he used inclusive reckoning, which meant that parts of four days were involved. In the same way the Bible described the time of Christ's death as three days and three nights even though it was only a part of those three days.

Passover Week Proves Resurrection

Now we are brought to another line of evidence which constitutes the final proof positive that the resurrection of Jesus occurred on Sunday. It was to this particular evidence that Paul turned in his persuasive Corinthian discourse on the resurrection. He said, "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures." 1 Corinthians 15:3, 4.

It is most significant that Paul confirmed the death of Jesus, and also His resurrection on the third day, on the basis of the Scriptures. Evidently, Paul understood that the Old Testament contained prophecies which set forth the time sequence of the crucifixion and the resurrection. According to Paul, Jesus had to rise on the third day in order to fulfill the word of God, Furthermore, Jesus also declared, "Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day." Luke 24:46.

Is there such a Scripture - an "It is written" - in the Old Testament which can establish the actual day that Christ was raised from the dead? Yes! And it had to do with the special annual observance of the Passover service.

In Leviticus 23:5, 6 we read about the first two days of that solemn Passover week. "In the fourteenth day of the first month at even is the Lord's passover. And on the fifteenth day of the same month is the feast of unleavened bread unto the Lord."

Right now we will not take the time to establish the days of the week for these special observances. It is not essential to the proof we are seeking to establish. Just let your mind grasp this truth - the fourteenth day of the month was the slaying of the passover, and the fifteenth day was the feast of unleavened bread.

Our next question is: What happened on the sixteenth day of the month? We shall now prove from the Scriptures that the sheaf of the firstfruits was offered on that sixteenth day. That service was first celebrated when the children of Israel came into the promised land. God commanded it in these words: "When ye be come into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest thereof, then ye shall bring the sheaf of the firstfruits of your harvest unto the priest: And he shall wave the sheaf before the Lord, to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it." Leviticus 23:10, 11.

What Sabbath is the verse talking about? The weekly Sabbath or the yearly passover sabbath? The answer appears as we read the actual experience of their entrance into the land, recorded by Joshua. God told them that after entering the promised land they should offer the firstfruits to Him before eating of the first harvest themselves. Joshua described how the Israelites passed over the Jordan while the river was flooded at the harvest time. "For Jordan overfloweth all his banks all the time of harvest." Joshua 3:15. This is very important to understand because the grain was ready for reaping, and they would more quickly be able to eat of the land and offer the first sheaf to the Lord.

After crossing dryshod through the flooded Jordan, after God rolled back the waters, the children of Israel camped at Gilgal. "And it came to pass, when the priests that bare up the ark of the covenant of the Lord were come up out of the midst of Jordan, and the soles of the priests' feet were lifted up unto the dry land, that the waters of Jordan returned unto their place, and flowed over all his banks, as they did before. And the people came up out of Jordan on the tenth day of the first month, and encamped in Gilgal, in the east border of Jericho." Joshua 4:18, 19.

Now we come to the next event which took place four days later. "And the children of Israel encamped in Gilgal, and kept the passover on the fourteenth day of the month at even in the plains of Jericho." Joshua 5:10.

In strict obedience to the commandment of the Lord, the grateful but weary wanderers stopped to slay the Passover lamb on the fourteenth day of the first month. The next verse tells us what happened on the following day, "And they did eat of the old corn of the land on the morrow after the passover, unleavened cakes, and parched corn in the selfsame day." Joshua 5:11.

Please notice that they observed the feast of unleavened bread on the fifteenth day of the month, following the slaying of the Passover lamb on the fourteenth. They also ate the last of the old corn, because the new crop of grain was ready to harvest. We continue reading to discover what happened on the next day, which was the sixteenth day of the month. "And the manna ceased on the morrow after they had eaten of the old corn of the land; neither had the children of Israel manna any more; but they did eat of the fruit of the land of Canaan that year." Joshua 5:12.

The sheaf of firstfruits was to be offered to the Lord before they ate of the harvest of the land. Since they began to eat of the fruit of the land on the sixteenth day, following the feast of unleavened bread, it is certain that they offered the firstfruits also on that day. Please remember that the Lord had commanded them to offer the firstfruits of the harvest "on the morrow after the sabbath." Leviticus 23:11. It was indeed on the day following the yearly sabbath of unleavened bread that the wave sheaf was offered, and the new harvest began to be eaten by the people that selfsame day.

Now the sequence of Passover events appears in sharp focus, and we will list them in the exact order revealed in the Scriptures.

Fourteenth day - Slaying of Passover lamb,

Fifteenth day - Feast of Unleavened Bread,

Sixteenth day - Firstfruits of harvest presented.

By way of historical confirmation of these points, here is the testimony of Josephus, a contemporary of Jesus and a historian: "Nisan ... is the beginning of our year, on the fourteenth day of the lunar month ... and which was called the Passover. ... The feast of unleavened bread succeeds that of the Passover, and falls on the fifteenth day of the month, and continues seven days. ... But on the second day of unleavened bread, which is the sixteenth day of the month, they first partake of the fruits of the earth. ... They also at his anticipation of the firstfruits of the earth, sacrifice a lamb, as a burnt offering unto God." Book III, Chapter X, par. 5, pp. 79, 80.

Christ Our Passover

You may be wondering how these facts relate to the time of Christ's death and resurrection. Here is where the beauty of the Bible reveals itself. Jesus was the One to whom all those types and ceremonies pointed. He was the true Passover Lamb. That is why John cried out, "Behold the Lamb of God!" John 1:36. Paul showed how Jesus fulfilled the Passover: "For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, ... but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." 1 Corinthians 5:7, 8.

This is exactly why Jesus died on the fourteenth of Nisan. He did it to fulfill the Scriptures. Paul declared that "Christ died for our sins, according to the scriptures." 1 Corinthians 15:3. He had to die on the same day that the Passover lamb died in order to meet the prophetic type and to establish His identity as the true Passover Lamb.

But just as surely as Jesus died on a certain day according to the Scriptures, He also "rose again the third day, according to the scriptures." 1 Corinthians 15:4. He not only was our Passover, but He was also the firstfruits! Paul ties it specifically to the resurrection: "But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits of them that slept." 1 Corinthians 15:20. Again in verse 23, "But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ's at his coming."

No wonder, then, that Paul wrote so confidently about the resurrection on the third day according to the Scriptures. Christ rose from the dead as the firstfruits of those that slept. He was the antitype of the wave sheaf, and His resurrection took place on the very day that the wave sheaf was to be presented before the Lord.

We can now understand why Jesus and His followers used the expression "third day" more than any other to describe the resurrection. Prophecy had decreed hundreds of years earlier that He would be the fulfillment of the types and shadows surrounding the Passover observance. As the firstfruits, it was essential for Christ to be "harvested" and "presented" before the Lord "on the morrow after the sabbath." In the year of the crucifixion the Passover sabbath coincided with the weekly Sabbath, making it "a high day." John 19:31. It was the next day after that Sabbath that Jesus arose from the grave - on Sunday.

When Mary saw Him in the garden after His resurrection, Jesus said, "Touch me not; for I am not yet ascended to my Father: but go to my brethren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father, and your Father; and to my God, and your God." John 20:17. Why did Jesus bid Mary not to hold Him or delay Him (as the Greek text implies)? Because He had to ascend that same day to present Himself before the Father as the firstfruits from the dead.

The biblical proof of those three successive days during Passover week completely shatters the Wednesday crucifixion theory. He had to die on Friday to fulfill the Scriptures concerning His death as the Passover lamb. He had to be resurrected on the third day after His death to meet the scriptural type of the firstfruits. Only three days can be involved in the time sequence, or the Word of God is broken.

In the light of this tremendous, undeniable evidence of the Word of God, we can positively affirm that Jesus was not, and could not have been, resurrected on the Sabbath. Neither could He have been crucified on a Wednesday.

The issues here are much deeper than most people realize. Had Christ not fulfilled every single Old Testament type and shadow pointing forward to His atoning death and resurrection, He would be an imposter and fraud. It was absolutely essential that every prophecy of the Messiah should be fulfilled in His life and death. In a special sense, the prefiguring of His victory over the grave was the capstone of hope for both Old and New Testament believers. Just as the sheaf of firstfruit grain held the promise and assurance of abundant harvest, even so our blessed Lord's glorious resurrection is the guarantee of a mighty harvest in the resurrection soon to take place. "Because I live, ye shall live also." John 14:19.

Shadows Which Are Contrary To Us

The tragedy is that some Christians still cling to the dead types and ceremonies just as though the great antitype had never come. Because Jesus was the true Sin Offering, the daily animal sacrifices ceased the very moment He died on the cross. The veil in the temple was rent from top to bottom, signifying that there was to be no more sprinkled blood in the holy place. Matthew 27:51. That slain lamb on the altar had been only a shadow pointing forward to the death of the Messiah. When the shadow led up to the body which cast it, there could not possibly be any shadow beyond. Therefore, sacrifices became only empty rituals after the atoning death of Jesus.

In the same manner, the yearly Passover service, with its types and shadows, pointed forward to the sacrifice of the true Passover Lamb on the cross. The annual typical lamb, the old leaven, and the yearly wave sheaf were the shadow leading up to the body, which was Christ. After His death and resurrection, the old observances would be just as meaningless as the daily sacrifice of sin offerings. In a sense, to continue observing the type after the antitype came would be a denial that Christ was the true fulfillment. This is why Paul spoke of the fulfilled types as being contrary to the Christians. "Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross; ... Let no man therefore judge you in meat, or in drink, ... or of the new moon, or of the sabbath days: Which are a shadow of things to come; but the body is of Christ." Colossians 2:14, 16, 17.

Please notice the clear evidence that meat and drink offerings, as well as certain shadowy holy days and sabbaths, came to an end when Jesus died. Now let us ask: Which sabbaths were nailed to the cross and canceled by the death of Jesus? Paul specified that they were "sabbath days which are a shadow of things to come." This certainly could not mean the weekly seventh-day Sabbath. It came into existence before sin came in to the world. It could not be a shadow. Shadows were introduced as a result of sin and pointed forward to the deliverance from sin. But there were other yearly sabbaths which were shadows, and they are specifically described in Leviticus 23:24, 25. They fell on certain set days of the month and came only once a year. "Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, ... an holy convocation. ... Ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord." This was the annual feast of trumpets. It was called a sabbath, but it was a yearly, shadowy sabbath.

Three other annual sabbaths are described in that same chapter, one of them being the Passover sabbath and another the feast of unleavened bread. Verses 37 and 38 sum up all of them in these words: "These are the feasts of the Lord, which ye shall proclaim to be holy convocations, to offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord, a burnt offering, and a meat offering, a sacrifice, and drink offerings, every thing upon his day: Beside the sabbaths of the Lord."

These texts show without question that the shadowy annual sabbaths were distinct from the weekly sabbaths of the Lord which were observed each seventh day. But don't miss this point: Paul did not indicate that the weekly Sabbath was blotted out at the cross. He designated only the sabbaths that were shadows of things to come. The meat and drink clearly had reference to the various offerings which were required on those ceremonial sabbaths. These were nailed to the cross! The Passover and feast of unleavened bread were included in those sabbaths which were blotted out.

No Christian today needs to celebrate those annual feast days and typical observances. Paul implies that to do so is to go contrary to Christian principles. They are now dead forms, bereft of any meaning. Just as the animal sacrifice for sin is meaningless since Christ came, so the other types and shadows are empty since the real Lamb has died. This is why Paul wrote, "For even Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven ... but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth." 1 Corinthians 5:7, 8.

May we fasten our faith upon the true Sin Offering, the true Passover, and the true Firstfruits, refusing to be drawn back to hollow forms and empty shadows.

These articles by Samuele Bacchiocchi, can be found at: http://www2.andrews.edu/~samuele/books/crucifixion/

The Time of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection

Some Christian churches teach that Christ was entombed on a Wednesday afternoon and that He resurrected exactly 72 hours later on a Saturday afternoon. These churches view a full three days and three nights entombment of Christ as the messianic sign par excellence given by Jesus.

In The Time of the Crucifixion and the Resurrection, Dr. Samuele Bacchiocchi thoroughly examines the crucial texts used in support of the Wednesday crucifixion dating. The book offers compelling Biblical and historical evidences which clearly refute the Wednesday-crucifixion and Saturday-resurrection dating.

The aim of the book is to help Wednesday crucifixionists to recognize the weaknesses of their interpretation of key Biblical passages and to accept the trust worthiness of the traditional chronology of the Friday-crucifixion and Sunday-resurrection.

This new edition includes five chapters dealing with the following related topics: the reckoning of the day in Bible times, the reckoning of the Sabbath today, the meaning of Christ’s death, the heavenly ministry of Christ, and the sabbatical typologies of Messianic redemption in the Old Testament. Special attention is given to the heavenly phase of Christ’s redemptive ministry and its relevance for Christians today.

*************

Chapter 2

THE SIGN OF JONAH

Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D., Andrews University

Is the "Good Friday, Easter Sunday" tradition a fact or a fable? Few Christian churches believe that this tradition is truly a fable devoid of Biblical support. This belief rests first of all on the interpretation of the so-called "sign of Jonah."

In response to a request for a sign by some doubting scribes and Pharisees, Christ made a startling statement: "An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah. For as Jonah was three days and three nights in the belly of the whale, so will the Son of Man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth" (Matt 12:39-40).

I. THE DURATION OF THE ENTOMBMENT

What is the sign of Jonah that Christ gave to His unbelieving generation as a proof of His Messiahship? Wednesday Crucifixionists firmly believe that the sign consisted not simply of the resurrection which Christ, like Jonah, would experience after a temporary burial, but primarily of the exact period of 72-hour entombment in the heart of the earth.

An Exact Length of Time. This conviction is emphatically expressed, for example, in the booklet The Resurrection Was Not on Sunday, published by the Department of Theology of Ambassador College: "Jesus offered but one evidence [of His Messiahship]. That evidence was not the fact of the resurrection itself. It was the length of time He would repose in His grave, before being resurrected."1

The implication of this contention is clearly stated in the next paragraph which reads: "Jesus staked His claim to being your Savior and mine upon remaining exactly three days and three nights in the tomb. If He remained just three days and three nights inside the earth, He would prove Himself the Savior—if He failed in this sign, He must be rejected as an impostor."2

72-Hour Entombment. Statements such as the ones just quoted clearly reveal the fundamental importance attached to a 72-hour duration of Christ’s entombment. This conviction rests on the assumption that when "days and nights" are explicitly mentioned in the Bible, they represent literal 24 hour days. Appeal is made to the creation week where each day consists of "evening and morning" that is, of a day and a night.

The designation of each creation day as "evening and morning" is seen as "the only Bible definition which explains and counts up the amount of time involved in the expression ‘the third day.’ It includes three dark periods called ‘night’ and three light periods called ‘day’—three days and three nights, and Jesus said they contained twelve hours for each period [John 11:9-10]—a total of 72 hours."3

II. THE SIGN OF THE RESURRECTION

The interpretation which views the sign of Jonah as being primarily an exact 72-hour period of Christ’s entombment is discredited by three major reasons. These, as we shall now show, indicate that the sign of Jonah consisted not in a 72-hour entombment but in the miracle of the Resurrection.

Absence of Time Reference. The first significant reason is the absence of any time reference in the other two passages mentioning the sign of Jonah (Matt 16:4; Luke 11:29-32). In Luke 11:29-30 Jesus says: "This generation is an evil generation; it seeks a sign, but no sign shall be given to it except the sign of Jonah. For as Jonah became a sign to the men of Nineveh, so will the Son of man be to this generation."

Note should be taken of the fact that in Luke there is no reference to the length of time Jonah survived in the whale’s belly. If the sign of Jonah consisted of the time factor, Luke could hardly have ignored it. The comparison in Luke between Jonah and Christ is not in terms of identical duration of entombment, but of similar miraculous Resurrections: "as Jonah . . . so will the Son of man be."

The book of Jonah suggests that Jonah became a sign to the Ninevites through the miraculous way in which God raised Jonah out of the whale’s belly and cast him alive on shore. This experience gave Jonah the compulsion to preach, and the Ninevites the conviction to repent. In the same way as God’s rescue of Jonah revealed Jonah’s prophetic mandate which led many Ninevites to repent, so Christ’s Resurrection would reveal His Messiahship which would lead many to believe.

The vast majority of commentaries consulted agree in viewing the sign of Jonah as being primarily the sign of Christ’s Resurrection. Norval Geldenhuys, for example, writes in The New International Commentary on The Gospel of Luke: "Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites, because he appeared there as one sent by God after having been miraculously saved from the great fish (as it were raised from the dead) as a proof that he was really sent by God. So also Jesus will by His resurrection prove conclusively that He has been sent by God as the Christ, the promised Redeemer."4

A Parallel Example. A second significant reason is found in the similar passage of John 2:19 where in response to the same request by the Jews for a sign Jesus replied: "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up." In this statement Christ makes His Resurrection the unmistakable sign of His Messiahship. By virtue of the parallelism between this text and Matthew 12:40 (in both places a sign is asked for and given), it seems legitimate to conclude that the sign of Jonah is essentially the same in both places, namely, the sign of the Resurrection, which is implicit in the first text and explicit in the second.

The Testimony of the Catacombs. A third reason is provided by the early Christians’ pictorial representation of the sign of Jonah. In numerous frescos of the catacombs, Christ’s Resurrection is symbolically represented as Jonah being spewed out by the whale. In fact, the scene of Jonah (known as "Jonah’s cycle" because it consists of different scenes) is perhaps the most common symbolic representation of Christ’s Resurrection.

The catacombs indicate, then, that the early Christians identified the sign of Jonah with the event of the Resurrection and not with its time element. Paul himself indirectly confirms this view when he writes that Christ was "designated Son of God in power . . . by his resurrection from the dead" (Rom 1:4).

In the light of the above considerations we conclude that the sign of Jonah given by Christ as a proof of His Messiahship consists primarily in His future Resurrection and not in an exact 72-hour entombment. Christ’s Resurrection was the unmistakable vindication of His Messiahship, of which the emergence of Jonah from what was a temporary living burial was in some sense a foreshadowing.

III. INCLUSIVE RECKONING

The literal interpretation of the phrase "three days and three nights" as representing an exact period of 72 hours ignores the abundant Biblical and Rabbinical evidence on the idiomatic use of the phrase "a day and a night," to refer not to an exact number of hours or of minutes, but simply to a calendrical day, whether complete or incomplete. Matthew, for example, writes that Jesus "fasted forty days and forty nights" in the wilderness (Matt 4:2). The same period is given in Mark 1:13 and Luke 4:2 as "forty days," which does not necessarily require forty complete 24 hour days.5

It is important to note that in Biblical times a fraction of a day or of a night was reckoned inclusively as representing the whole day or night. This method of reckoning is known as "inclusive reckoning." A few examples from the Bible and from Rabbinic literature will suffice to demonstrate its usage.

An Abandoned Egyptian. 1 Samuel 30:12 speaks of an abandoned Egyptian servant who "had not eaten bread or drunk water for three days and three nights." The idiomatic usage of this expression is shown by the following verse, where the servant states that his master had left him behind "three days ago" (v. 13). If the "three days and three nights" were meant to be taken literally, then the servant should have said that he had been left behind four days before.

Esther’s Visit to the King. Another explicit example of inclusive day reckoning is found in the story of Esther’s visit to the king. When Queen Esther was informed by Mordecai about the plan to exterminate the Jews, she sent this message to him: "Go, gather all the Jews to be found in Susa, and hold a fast on my behalf, and neither eat nor drink for three days, night or day. I and my maids will also fast as you do. Then I will go to the King" (Esther 4:16).

If Esther intended the three days and three nights to be taken literally as a 72-hour period of fasting, then she should have presented herself before the King on the fourth day. However, we are told a few verses later that Esther went before the king "on the third day" (Esther 5:1). Examples such as these clearly show that the expression "three days and three nights" is used in the Scriptures idiomatically to indicate not three complete 24-hour days, but three calendric days of which the first and the third could have consisted of only a fraction of a day.6

Rabbinical Literature. Explicit examples for inclusive day reckoning are also found in Rabbinic literature. Rabbi Eleazar ben Azariah, who lived about A.D. 100, stated: "A day and a night are an Onah [‘a portion of time’] and the portion of an Onah is as the whole of it."7 There are other instances in Rabbinic literature where the "three days and three nights" of Jonah 1:17 are combined with Old Testament passages which mention events that took place "on the third day."8 "It is in this light," writes Gerhard Dilling in the Theological Dictionary of the New Testament, "that we are to understand Matthew 12:40."9

Jewish Practice. The practice of inclusive day reckoning, according to The Jewish Encyclopedia, a standard Jewish reference work, is still in vogue among the Jews today. "In Jewish communal life part of a day is at times reckoned as one day; e.g., the day of the funeral, even when the latter takes place late in the afternoon, is counted as the first of the seven days of mourning; a short time in the morning of the seventh day is counted as the seventh day; circumcision takes place on the eighth day, even though on the first day only a few minutes remained after the birth of the child, these being counted as one day."10

The examples cited above clearly indicate that in Biblical times the expression "a day and a night" simply meant a day, whether complete or incomplete. Thus, in the light of the prevailing usage, the expression "three days and three nights" of Matthew 12:40 does not require that Jesus be entombed for 72 hours, but for a full day and two partial days.

IV. ON THE THIRD DAY

A conclusive confirmation of the Biblical method of inclusive day reckoning is provided by the two most common Greek phrases used in the Gospels to describe the time between the Crucifixion and the Resurrection, namely, te trite hemera and meta treis hemeras, which can be literally translated as on the third day and after three days, respectively. The latter phrase, which is used four times in the Gospels (Mark 8:31; 9:31; 10:34; Matt 27:63), if taken in isolation would confirm the literal interpretation of "three days and three nights" (Matt 12:40), since the latter requires the Resurrection to take place after three whole days from the time of the Crucifixion.

A Parallel Usage. This interpretation, however, is discredited by the fact that the very same statement of Christ which contains the phrase "after three days" in one Gospel, is reported in another Gospel with the phrase "on the third day." To clarify this point, in the following table we shall set out the occurrences of these two phrases in the parallel passages of the Synoptic Gospels:

Mark 8:31 "after three days rise again"
Matthew 16:31 "on the thirdday be raised"
Luke 9:22 "on the third day be raised"
Mark 9:31 "after three days he will rise"
Matthew 17:23 "he will be raised on the third day"
Mark 10:34 "after three days he will rise"
Matthew 20:19 "he will be raised on the third day"
Luke 18:33 "on the third day he will rise"

Identical Meaning. This comparison clearly indicates that Matthew and Luke understood Mark’s "after three days" as meaning "on the third day." Further evidence for the basic identity of the two phrases is provided by Matthew 27:63-64. In verse 63 the Jewish leaders tell Pilate that Christ had said, "After three days I will rise again." In actual fact, up to this point only the expression "on the third day" occurs in Matthew (16:21; 17:23; 20:19), which suggests the identical meaning of the two phrases.

Verse 64 provides additional confirmation when the Jewish leaders request Pilate to have the tomb guarded "until the third day." David Clark keenly observes in his article "After Three Days," published in The Bible Translator, that "Unless this expression [‘until the third day’] referred to a space of time identical with, or at least as great as, that referred to by ‘after three days’ in the previous verse, then the guard would not extend over the whole of the critical period, and the entire paragraph would thus lose its point."11

The same author expresses astonishment at the fact that translators of all major English versions have entirely overlooked "the awkward fact that after three days/three days later does not mean the same thing in English as on the third day."12 Thus, for the sake of accuracy, Clark proposes to use the phrase "on the third day"consistently in all the passages mentioned above.

V. FIRST DAY APPEARANCES

The literal interpretation of the "three days and three nights" is also discredited by Luke’s account of Christ’s appearance on Sunday evening to the two disciples who were going to the village of Emmaus. Christ, whom they had not recognized caught up with them and asked them, "What is this conversation which you are holding with each other as you walk?" (Luke 24:17).

The two men, surprised at Jesus’ unawareness of what had happened in Jerusalem, recounted to Him "how our chief priests and rulers delivered him [Christ] to be condemned to death, and crucified him. But we had hoped that he was the one to redeem Israel. Yes, and besides all this, it is not the third day since this happened" (Luke 24:21).13

Third Day on Sunday Evening. To appreciate the significance of the last statement, notice must be taken of two facts. First, the statement was made on the "evening" of the first day when the day was "far spent" (Luke 24:29). Second, "the third day" refers specifically to the events mentioned in the immediate context, namely, Christ’s condemnation and Crucifixion. It is obvious, then, that if Christ had been crucified on a Wednesday afternoon, those two disciples could not have referred to that event on a Sunday night, saying: "It is now the third day since this happened." According to the Jewish inclusive day-reckoning, it would have been the fifth day and not the third.

VI. CHRONOLOGY OF PASSION WEEKEND

The chronology of the Passion weekend provides further evidence of the idiomatic usage of the phrase "three days and three nights." The days of the Crucifixion, entombment, and Resurrection are given in clear sequence and with considerable clarity in the Gospels as Preparation day, Sabbath, first day.

Mark, who writes for a Gentile readership less familiar with Jewish terminology, explains with utmost clarity that Christ was crucified on "the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath" (Mark 15:42). In the following chapter it will be shown that both the term "preparation" (paraskeue) and "Sabbath-eve" (pro-sabbaton) are two technical terms used unmistakably to designate what we call "Friday."

Mark, then, is most precise in explaining that the Crucifixion took place on what today we call "Friday." The next day is designated by Mark as "sabbath" (Mark 16:1) which in turn is followed by the "first day of the week" (Mark 16:2). Mark’s chronological sequence leaves absolutely no room for a two-day interval between the Crucifixion and Resurrection.

Similarly Luke makes it clear that the day of Christ’s Crucifixion was followed, not by a Thursday or a Friday, but by a weekly Sabbath. He writes: "It was the day of Preparation, and the sabbath was beginning" (Luke 23:54). By linking the beginning of the Sabbath to the end of the day of Preparation, and the beginning of the "first day of the week" (Luke 24:1) to the termination of the Sabbath (Luke 23:56), Luke leaves absolutely no room for two full days to intervene between the Crucifixion and Resurrection.

No Two Sabbaths. Some wish to make room for intervening days by arguing that between the Wednesday Crucifixion and Saturday afternoon resurrection there were two Sabbaths: the first, a Passover Sabbath which fell on a Thursday; the second, a weekly Sabbath which fell on the regular Saturday. Such an argument is based on pure speculation because nowhere do the Gospels suggest that two Sabbaths intervened between the day of the Crucifixion and that of the Resurrection.

Support for the two-Sabbath view is sought in the plural form the Sabbath in Matthew 28:1 takes, which literally reads "at the end of the Sabbaths." This text is viewed as "a vital text" which "proves that there were TWO Sabbaths that week with a day in between." The first Sabbath, Thursday, allegedly was "the annual high-day Sabbath, the feast day of the days of Unleavened Bread," while the second was "the weekly Sabbath, Saturday."14

This conclusion is untenable, because, as Harold W. Hoehner points out, "The term Sabbath is frequently (one-third of all its New Testament occurrences) in the plural form in the New Testament when only one day is in view. For example, in Matthew 12:1-12 both the singular and plural forms are used (cf. esp. v. 5)."15 There is then no Biblical basis for a Passover Sabbath which occurred two days before the regular weekly Sabbath.

The clear and uninterrupted chronological sequence of days given in the Gospels is: Preparation day, Sabbath day, and first day. This sequence leaves absolutely no room for a literal interpretation of the phrase "three days and three nights" as representing an exact period of 72 hours.

Conclusion. The foregoing considerations have shown, first, that the sign of Jonah given by Christ to prove His Messiahship consisted not in an exact 72-hour entombment, but in His Resurrection on the third day after His death. Second, the phrase "three days and three nights" (Matt 12:40) is an idiomatic expression which in Bible times meant not necessarily three complete 24-hour days (72 hours), but rather three calendric days, of which the first and the third could have consisted of only a few hours.

The latter conclusion is supported by the prevailing inclusive method of day-reckoning, by the parallel usage of the phrases "after three days" and "on the third day," and by the uninterrupted chronological sequence of days which does not allow for three complete 24-hour days. A recognition of these facts adequately explains how Jesus fulfilled His prediction of a "three days and three nights" entombment by being buried on Friday afternoon and rising early on Sunday morning.

NOTES ON CHAPTER II

1. Herbert W. Armstrong, The Resurrection Was Not on Sunday (Pasadena, California: Ambassador College, 1972), p. 4; emphasis supplied.

2. Ibid., p. 4.

3. Ibid., p. 6.

4. Norval Geldenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, 1983), p. 334. Similarly Leon Morris comments: "For the Ninevites the sign was the reappearance of a man who had apparently been dead for three days. For the men of Jesus’ day the sign would be the reappearance of the Son of Man on the third day after His death" (The Gospel According to St. Luke, The Tyndale New Testament Commentaries [Grand Rapids, 1982], p. 201.

5. Similar examples are found in Gen 7:4, 12; Ex 24:18; 34:28; 1 Kings 19:8; Job 2:13.

6. For more examples and a discussion of the inclusive reckoning, see Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vol. II, pp. 136-137; vol. V, pp. 248-251.

7. Jerusalem Talmud, Shabbath 9, 3; cf. also Babylonian Talmud, Pesahim 4a.

8. See Midrash Rabbah: Genesis 56,1 (on Gen 22:4); Genesis 91,7 (on Gen 42:17-18); Esther 9,2 (on Esther 5:1).

9. Gerhard Dilling, "hemera," in Theological Dictionary of the New Testament (Grand Rapids, 1974), vol. II, p. 950.

10. The Jewish Encyclopedia, s.v. "Day," vol. IV, p. 475.

11. David Clark, "After Three Days," The Bible Translator 30 (July 1979): 341.

12. Ibid., pp. 342, 343.

13. Emphasis supplied.

14. Herbert W. Armstrong (n. 1), p. 13.

15. Harold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ (Grand Rapids, 1977), pp. 69-70.

*************

Chapter 3

THE DAY OF THE CRUCIFIXION

Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D., Andrews University

Is the Wednesday Crucifixion a fact or a fable? Wednesday Crucifixionists firmly believe that it is a Biblical fact. To support it, they appeal not only to the sign of Jonah examined in the previous chapter, but also to a second key text, namely, John 19:14, where the day of Christ’s Crucifixion is designated as "the day of Preparation of the Passover."

The conclusion drawn from John 19:14 is that Christ was crucified, not on a Friday—the Preparation day for the Sabbath—but on a Wednesday—the Preparation day for the annual ceremonial Passover Sabbath, which that year supposedly fell on a Thursday. Thus, all the references to the "Preparation day" of Christ’s Crucifixion (Matt 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31, 42) are interpreted in the light of John 19:14 as meaning Wednesday—the day preceding the Passover Sabbath (Thursday)—rather than Friday—the day preceding the regular seventh-day Sabbath.

The three major reasons generally given in support of this conclusion are succinctly stated in the booklet The Time Element in the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ, published by the Church of God (Seventh Day): "Firstly, the day before the weekly Sabbath was never called a ‘preparation’ in the Bible; secondly, the weekly Sabbath (as designated in the Ten Commandments) was never called or referred to as a ‘high day’; and thirdly, the same writer (John) tells us . . . exactly which occasion this preparation day preceded. He said: ‘And it was the preparation of the Passover’ (John 19:14) . . . Thus, after John states this ‘was the preparation of the passover’ (in verse 14), we must understand . . . that ‘the sabbath day’ in verse 31 corresponds to ‘the passover’in verse 14."1

A brief analysis will now be made of the three given reasons in an attempt to determine what is meant by the "Preparation" day mentioned in all the four Gospels as a time reference of the day of Christ’s Crucifixion.

I. PREPARATION DAY

The first reason given for interpreting "the day of Preparation" as meaning Wednesday rather than Friday is that "the day before the weekly Sabbath was never called a ‘preparation’ in the Bible." This reason is puzzling, to say the least, because it flies in the face of the irrefutable Biblical and historical usage of the term "Preparation-paraskeue" as a technical designation for "Friday." In addition to its occurrence in John 19:14, the term "Preparation-paraskeue" is used five times in the Gospels as a technical designation for "Friday" (Matt 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31, 42).

Mark’s Definition. Mark 15:42 provides what is perhaps the clearest definition of the expression "day of Preparation" by the statement: "It was the day of Preparation, that is, the day before the Sabbath." Note that in Greek the two phrases "the day of Preparation" and "the day before the Sabbath" are each given with a single technical term: "paraskeue-Preparation," and "pro-sabbaton-Sabbath-eve." Translated literally the text reads: "It was Preparation, that is, Sabbath-eve." For the sake of clarity, Mark uses two technical terms here, both of which unmistakably designate what we call "Friday."

The term "prosabbaton-Sabbath-eve" was used by Hellenistic Jews to designate explicitly and exclusively "the day before the Sabbath, i.e. Friday" (Judith 8:6; 2 Macc. 8:26).2 Thus Mark, by defining "paraskeue-Preparation" as being the "prosabbaton-Sabbath-eve," gives the clearest possible definition to his Gentile readers of what he meant by "paraskeue," namely, the day before the weekly Sabbath. Clarifications of time references by a qualifying clause are common in Mark, evidently because the author knew that his Gentile readers were generally unfamiliar with Jewish terms and customs.3

A Technical Designation for "Friday." An English reader could fail to see the technical usage of the term "Preparation," because in the English language such a term is a generic noun which does not mean "Friday." The situation was much different in the Semitic Greek of our Palestinian document, however, where the term "paraskeue" was the Greek equivalent of the Aramaic word "arubta-eve," both of which were commonly used to designate "Friday."

In Aramaic, as Charles C. Torrey explains, "the middle days of the week were designated by numbers, ‘third, fourth, fifth,’ but Friday was always arubta; there was no ‘sixth day’ of the week; . . . Its Greek equivalent, paraskeue-Friday, was likewise adopted, from the first, by the Greek Church."4

The early Christian usage of the term "paraskeue," as a technical designation for Friday is well attested outside the New Testament. The Didache (or The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles), dated between A.D. 70 to 120, enjoins Christians to fast on "the fourth day and Preparation" (8:1), that is, Wednesday and Friday. It is noteworthy that Friday is designated simply as "Preparation-paraskeuen," without the article or the noun "day," thus indicating the technical usage of the term.

By the time of Tertullian (c. A.D. 160-225) paraskeue had already become such a fixed name for Friday that he even argues that this had been the name for Friday since creation.5 These, and similar examples,6 clearly indicate that Christians adopted the Jewish practice of numbering the first five days of the week and of naming the sixth and the seventh as paraskeue and sabbaton—Preparation and Sabbath.

The Need for a Clarification. Christians coming from a Gentile background had to learn this Judeo-Christian nomenclature of the week-days, because in the pagan world the week-days were not numbered but named after the seven planetary deities (dies solis, dies lunae, . . . ). This may explain why Mark, in writing to a Gentile-Christian readership who had only recently learned the Judeo-Christian nomenclature of the week-days, deemed it necessary to clarify what he meant by "paraskeue-preparation," by adding the qualifying phrase, "that is, the day before the sabbath" (Mark 15:42). This clarification may also have been necessitated by the fact that the seven-day planetary week itself had been recently introduced in the Roman world where the eight-day week (nundinum) was still used side by side with the planetary week.7

Additional and conclusive evidence that "paraskeue-Preparation" is used in the Gospels to designate "Friday" and not "Wednesday" is provided by the sequence in which the days of the Passion weekend are given: "Preparation, Sabbath, first day" (Matt 27:62; 28:1; Mark 15:42; 16:1; Luke 24:54-55; 24:1). Both Mark and Matthew explicitly place the beginning of the first day at the end of the Sabbath (Mark 16:1; Matt 28:1). The latter could hardly have been a Thursday Passover Sabbath, because Thursday is not followed by the first day of the week.

A Reason for the Misunderstanding. The failure to recognize the technical usage of the term "Preparation" as the name for "Friday," has caused some to misinterpret John’s phrase "it was the day of Preparation of the Passover" (John 19:14) as meaning "the day of Preparation for the Passover." The latter is in fact the translation of the American Revised Standard Version. On the basis of this misunderstanding, Wednesday Crucifixionists argue that in John "the day of Preparation" means not Friday but the Wednesday preceding the Passover day, which supposedly fell on a Thursday.

This conclusion ignores the fact, cogently stated by Norval Geldenhuys, "that at the time when John wrote, the Greek term paraskeue (‘preparation’) was already for a long time the technical term used to indicate ‘Friday,’ the equivalent of the Hebrew erebh shabbath."8 The recognition of this fact is evident in the right translation which is found in the A.V., R.S.V., and N.I.V., namely "the day of Preparation of the Passover."

This means, as Geldenhuys explains, "that the day of the Lord’s crucifixion was the Friday of the Passover, the Friday that falls during Passover week, i.e., Passover Friday (Good Friday). It is a grammatically correct rendering and all the evidence is in favor of it."9

The foregoing considerations make it abundantly clear that in the Gospels, as stated by Moulton and Milligan, noted authorities on the Greek language: "paraskeue is a technical designation for Friday."10 Thus, the first reason, which claims that "the day before the weekly Sabbath was never called a ‘preparation’ in the Bible" must be regarded as false, because, as we have shown, the very opposite is true.

II. A HIGH DAY

The second reason given for interpreting "the day of Preparation" as referring to Wednesday rather than Friday is based on John’s definition of the Sabbath day which followed the Preparation day of Christ’s Crucifixion. John explains: "that sabbath was a high day" (John 19:31). It is argued that since "the weekly Sabbath (as designated in the Ten Commandments) was never called or referred to as a ‘high day,’"11 then the latter must have been not the regular weekly Sabbath but the annual ceremonial Passover Sabbath (Lev 23:5-7).

In support of this conclusion, a third reason is given, namely, that John 19:14 "tells us exactly which occasion this preparation day preceded. He says: ‘And it was the preparation of the passover.’"12 Thus the "high day" Sabbath of John 19:31 is interpreted as being the "Passover" day of John 19:14, and by the same token "the day of Preparation" of verse 31 is interpreted as being the Passover day of verse 14. Since in the year of Christ’s Crucifixion, Passover day supposedly fell on a Thursday, the day of preparation for the latter would obviously be a Wednesday.

A Ceremonial Sabbath. The reasons given in support of this conclusion rest on three major mistaken assumptions. First, it is assumed that since certain annual feasts such as the Day of Atonement are designated as "sabbath" (Lev 23:24, 32, 39), then all the references to the Sabbath found in the Passion narratives must refer not to the weekly Sabbath but to the annual ceremonial Passover Sabbath.

This assumption is discredited by the fact that the day of atonement is designated by the compound expression shabbath shabbathon, meaning "a sabbath of solemn rest" (Lev 23:32; 16:31). But this phrase is rendered in the Septuagint by the compound Greek expression "sabbata sabbaton," which is different from the simple "sabbaton" used in the Passion narratives. It is therefore linguistically impossible to interpret the latter as a reference to the day of the Passover or to any other annual feast day, since these are never designated simply as "sabbaton."

High Day: Passover or Sabbath? The second mistaken assumption is that the term "high day-megale hemera," used in John 19:31, is employed in the Scripture to designate the annual Passover feast (a ceremonial Sabbath), rather than a special weekly Sabbath. Unfortunately, no Biblical or extra-Biblical examples are cited to support this assumption—the reason being simply that no such examples exist .

Israel Abrahams, a noted Jewish scholar, finds no instance before John 19:31 of the use of the term "high day" or "Great Sabbath" in Rabbinical literature. His opinion is that the later Rabbinic use of the term "Great Sabbath" to designate the Sabbath of the Passover season was borrowed from the church.13 While the latter is difficult to prove, it is a well-known fact that the church coined the terms "Good Friday" and "Holy Saturday" as designations for the special days of Christ’s Crucifixion and burial. It is noteworthy that Georgius Codinus (15th century) gives the official term for "Good Friday" as "he megale paraskeue—the great Preparation."14 This suggests the possibility that even the Sabbath of the Passion week came early to be known by Christians as a "high day" or a "Great Sabbath."

Note should be taken also of the fact that, according to examples given by Strack and Billerbeck, in later Rabbinic literature the seventh-day Sabbath is regarded as a "high day" if it fell on Nisan 15, since that was the first day of the Passover festival, or if it fell on Nisan 16, because on that day the omer or first sheaf of barley was offered according to Pharisaic tradition.15

This information is important because it disproves the claim that "the weekly Sabbath was never called or referred to as a "high day." Rabbinical sources seem to indicate that the weekly Sabbath was called a "high day" when it coincided with Passover, because, as well stated by Charles C. Torrey, "its inherent solemnity was greatly heightened by the celebration of the foremost feast of the year."16

III. PREPARATION OF THE PASSOVER

The third mistaken assumption is that the term "Preparation" found in John 19:14, "It was the day of Preparation of the Passover" is used as a technical designation for the day before the Passover. It is also assumed that this "Preparation" day fell on a Wednesday because Passover day allegedly fell on a Thursday. On the basis of these assumptions, it is further assumed that all the other five references to the "Preparation" day (Matt 27:62; Mark 15:42; Luke 23:54; John 19:31, 42) must be interpreted in the light of John 19:14 as meaning Wednesday.

Friday of the Passover Week. These assumptions are false on several counts. First of all, because, as Charles C. Torrey explains, "There is no evidence to show that that word [Preparation] was used in the time of the Gospel writers for the ‘eve’ of other festal days than the Sabbath."17 Milligan and Moulton emphasize the same point, saying: "It has never been shown that the day before the Passover was called ‘The preparation of the Passover.’"18 Leon Morris expresses the same view, saying: "The fact must be faced that no example of the use of paraskeue is cited for any day other than Friday."19 Moreover, as J. H. Bernard points out, if "Preparation" meant "the Preparation day of the Passover" we would expect a definite article in Greek, which, however, is absent.20

An additional indication that John meant "Friday" by the phrase "Preparation of the Passover" (v. 14) is provided by the usage of the same term "paraskeue" twice again in the same chapter. In verse 31 John explains that the Jews did not wish the bodies to remain on the Cross "on the Sabbath, because it was Preparation" (literal translation). Here John not only mentions the Sabbath explicitly, but also refers to the preceding day by the technical term "paraskeue—Preparation" without the article, thus meaning: "because it was Friday."

Similarly, in verse 42, John reports that Jesus was placed in a garden tomb near the place of His Crucifixion "because of the Preparation of the Jews." In this context the term "Preparation" is used again by itself, not in a generic sense, but in a temporal sense as a technical designation for Friday. What John is saying is that Jesus was buried in the garden tomb because it was near and because it was late Friday (Preparation) when the Sabbath was about to start. In the light of the above considerations, the expression "the day of Preparation of the Passover" (John 19:14), simply means, as most scholars acknowledge, "the Friday of the Passover week."

The Testimony of the Synoptics. Further support for this conclusion is provided by the Synoptics where the same "Preparation" day mentioned by John is unmistakably identified with Friday, the day before the weekly Sabbath (Mark 15:42; Matt 27:62; Luke 23:54).

Any attempt to interpret the Synoptic references to the day of "Preparation" in the light of John 19:14 as meaning "Wednesday," is unwarranted for at least two reasons. First, because, as shown earlier, the term "Preparation" was never used as a technical designation for the day preceding the Passover. Second, because, even granting that John used the term "Preparation" to mean "Wednesday Passover-eve," such a meaning cannot be automatically read back in the parallel references found in the Synoptics, because the Matthean, Marcan, and Lucan communities understood this term, not in the light of what John wrote later, but in the light of its context in their respective Gospels and in the light of its prevailing usage.

Undisputed Tradition. A final and equally important consideration is the fact that Christian tradition has unanimously held to the Friday-Crucifixion/Sunday-Resurrection chronology. This is all the more surprising in view of the fact that some early Christian writers did place the Last Supper on Tuesday evening rather than Thursday evening. With regard to the Crucifixion, however, no early Christian writer ever disputed or doubted its occurrence on Friday.

The absence of any early Christian polemic regarding the day of Christ’s Crucifixion and Resurrection, offers, in our view, overwhelming proof of the trustworthiness of the traditional chronology of the Crucifixion and Resurrection. If indeed Christ had risen on a Saturday afternoon, seventh-day Sabbathkeepers would have capitalized on this fact to discredit the Resurrection argument frequently used in early Christianity to defend Sundaykeeping. Such an argument, however, never appears in the polemic over the theological superiority of the two days.

Conclusion. The foregoing analysis of John 19:14, the second key text of the Wednesday Crucifixion theory, has shown that such a theory is based on human fantasy and not on a Biblical fact. We have submitted abundant evidence indicating that John’s expression "the day of Preparation of the Passover" (John 19:14), simply means, as most scholars acknowledge, "the Friday of the Passover week." Thus the Crucifixion took place on Friday and not on Wednesday.

NOTES ON CHAPTER III

1. The Time Element in the Crucifixion and Resurrection of Christ, published by the Bible Advocate Press of the Church of God (Seventh Day), p. 20.

2. See William F. Arndt and F. Wilbur Gingrich, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament (Chicago, 1979), s.v. "prosabbaton."

3. See, for example, Mark 1:32, 35; 4:35; 13:24; 14:30; 15:42; 16:2.

4. Charles C. Torrey, "The Date of the Crucifixion according to the Fourth Gospel," Journal of Biblical Literature 50 (1931): 234-235.

5. The Writings of Tertullian, Ante-Nicene Christian Library, vol. III, p. 309.

6. See, for example, The Martyrdom of Polycarp, 7, 1.

7. On the origin and adoption of the Planetary week in the Roman world, see Samuele Bacchiocchi, From Sabbath to Sunday (Rome, 1977), pp. 241-251.

8. Norval Geldenhuys, Commentary on the Gospel of Luke, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, 1983), p. 664.

9. Loc. cit.

10. W. Moulton and W. F. Milligan, Vocabulary of the Greek New Testament (New York, 1928), p. 545.

11. The Time Element (n. 1), p. 20.

12. Loc. cit.

13. Israel Abrahams, Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels (Cambridge, 1924), vol. II, p. 68.

14. De Officiis 13,1.

15. H. L. Strack and P. Billerbec, Kommentar zum Neuen Testament aus Talmud und Midrash (Munich, 1922-1928), vol. 2, pp. 581f. and 847.

16. Charles C. Torrey (n. 4), p. 235.

17. Charles C. Torrey, "In the Fourth Gospel the Last Supper was the Paschal Meal," The Jewish Quarterly Review, 42 (January 1952): 241.

18. W. Milligan and W. F. Moulton, Commentary on the Gospel of St. John (Edinburgh, 1898), on John 19:14.

19. Leon Morris, The Gospel According to John, The New International Commentary on the New Testament, (Grand Rapids, 1971), p. 777.

20. J. H. Bernard, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Gospel According to St. John (Edinburgh, 1928), on John 19:14.

*************

Chapter 4

THE DAY OF THE RESURRECTION

Samuele Bacchiocchi, Ph. D., Andrews University

Is the Easter-Sunday Resurrection a Biblical fact or an ecclesiastical fable? Wednesday Crucifixionists believe that it is a fable fabricated by "the so-called ‘apostolic fathers’ . . . to justify a pagan tradition of the Sunday resurrection of Nimrod, the pagan savior!"1 In their view Christ’s Resurrection occurred, not early on Sunday morning, but late on Saturday afternoon.

The "clinching proof" for the Saturday afternoon Resurrection of Christ is supposedly found in Matthew 28:1, 5-6. The text reads: "In the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week, came Mary Magdalene and the other Mary to see the sepulchre . . . And the angel answered and said unto the women, Fear not ye: for I know that ye seek Jesus, which was crucified. He is not here: for he is risen, as he said. Come, see the place where the Lord lay" (KJV).

This text allegedly pinpoints the time of the Resurrection on Saturday afternoon. The reasoning runs as follows: Since Matthew tells us that when the two Marys went to the sepulchre "in the end of the sabbath, as it began to dawn toward the first day of the week," they discovered that Christ had already risen, this means that His Resurrection occurred in the last part of the Sabbath before the next day began.

To defend this conclusion, the dawning of the first day is interpreted as being the beginning of dusk (evening) rather than of dawn (morning). The reasoning runs as follows: "Since the Sabbath ended at sunset, it would be impossible for ‘dawn’ to mean morning here, for the sun would not rise until some 12 hours later. It could not be in the end of the Sabbath and morning at the same time."2

An Apparent Contradiction. It must be granted that this reasoning represents an ingenious attempt to reconcile what many scholars view as two apparently contradictory statements. The contradiction lies in the fact that the end of the Sabbath at sunset does not mark the dawning of the first day, since the two events are about 12 hours apart.

The above interpretation, though ingenious, cannot be accepted for at least two reasons. First, because the verb "to dawn" (epiphosko) literally means not "to become dusk" but "to grow light," "to dawn." Second, because a figurative interpretation (i.e. to become dusk) in this instance runs against the explicit statements of the other Gospels which tell us that the women came to the empty tomb at daybreak "when the sun had risen" (Mark 16:2; cf. Luke 24:1; John 20:1). Thus other solutions must be found to this apparent contradiction.

I. LATE OR AFTER?

A first solution is suggested by the broader meaning of the adverb "opse" which is translated in the KJV as "in the end of" but in the RSV and most modern translations as "after." The two translations reflect the dual meanings of the term, namely "late" or "after."

An Approximate Time Reference. In the New Testament the term opse occurs only twice again, in Mark 11:19 and 13:35. In Mark 11:19 ("And when evening [opse] came they went out of the city") it is hard to tell by the context whether opse designates the late afternoon of that day or the time after sunset, which, according to the Jewish sunset to sunset reckoning, would be the beginning of the new day.

In Mark 13:35, however, opse ("evening") clearly designates the first watch of the night, from about sunset till about 9 p.m.: "Watch therefore for you do not know when the master of the house will come, in the evening (opse) or at midnight, or at cockcrow, or in the morning" (Mark 13:35). The fact that "opse" could mean not only the late hours of the day, but also the early hours of the new day, suggests the possibility that Matthew may have used the term as an approximate time reference simply to indicate that the Sabbath was over when the women went to the sepulchre.3

In the age of quartz watches when even seconds count, we expect the same accuracy from the Bible writers, who had only the sun at their disposal to measure time. The concern of Bible writers, however, seems to have been more with reporting the actual events than with the precise time of their occurrence. Mark, for example, says that Jesus was crucified approximately three hours earlier ("it was the third hour"—Mark 15:25) than John ("it was about the sixth hour"—John 19:16).

Similarly, the visit to the sepulchre occurred "while it was still dark" according to John (20:1) and "when the sun had risen" according to Mark (16:2). The existence of these time approximations in the Gospels suggests the possibility that Matthew also may have used opse loosely, simply to indicate that the women went to the sepulchre after the Sabbath was over and as the first day was dawning.

Late Greek Usage. The latter conclusion is supported by the usage of opse in late Greek writers as meaning "after." While in the ancient Greek, as A. T. Robertson explains, "opse . . . occurs as a preposition with the genitive (Thuc. 4, 93) with the sense of ‘late on,’" later Greek authors, like Philostratus, use the word in "the sense of ‘after,’ like . . . ‘after these things.’"4

Edgar J. Goodspeed, another renowned Greek scholar, makes the same observation. He explains that "the adverb opse is sometimes used in the sense of ‘late,’ with a genitive of time . . . which would mean ‘late on the Sabbath.’ . . . But opse has another sense; it is also used by late Greek writers like Philostratus (second to third century) as a preposition meaning ‘after,’ followed by the genitive, opse touton, ‘after these things’ (Life of Apollonius vi. 10; cf. 4:18: opse musterion ‘after the mysteries’). This is the sense of the word in Matthew 28:1 and at once clears up any difficulty . . . The plain sense of the passage is: ‘After the Sabbath, as the first day of the week was dawning.’"5

Standard Greek Lexicons. The same explanation is given in several standard Greek lexicons of the New Testament. Walter Bauer’s lexicon, for example, points out that opse is "used as an improper preposition with genitive [meaning] after, (opse sabbaton) after the Sabbath (Matthew 28:1)."6 Bauer gives several examples of this usage, including one of Polyaemus where the following phrase occurs: "later (opse) than the hour decided upon."7

Unfortunately some translations, such as the Revised Version, have ignored the late Greek usage of opse and thus they have translated Matthew 28:1 as "now late on the Sabbath day." This translation would mean that the women came to the tomb late on a Saturday. "This might be the sense of the Greek words used in the classics," but, as R. C. H. Lenski perceptively points out, "in the koine opse is used as a preposition and means ‘after,’ B.-P. 958; B.-D 164; Stellhorn, ‘long after something;’ Zahn, erst nach; R. 517. Mark agrees, ‘when the Sabbath was past.’"8

The same conclusion is reached by Edward Lohse, though from a different basis. He finds that the phrase opse sabbaton of Matthew 28:1, corresponds to the Rabbinic mosa’e shabbat "and thus means the night from the Sabbath to the first day of the week."9

Toward the Dawn. Further support for the meaning of opse sabbaton as "after the sabbath" rather than "late on the sabbath," is provided by the second time element given by Matthew to date the visit of the women to the sepulchre, namely, "toward the dawn of the first day of the week" (Matt 28:1).

The Greek verb epiphosko literally means "to shine forth," "to grow light," "to dawn." It must be said that this verb is used not only in a literal sense to describe the morning dawning of a new day, but also in a figurative sense to refer to the evening beginning of a day. In Luke 23:54 epiphosko is translated "drew on" (KJV) or "beginning" (RSV), in reference to the approach of the Sabbath at sundown.

In Matthew 28:1, however, expositors are generally agreed that the verb epiphosko is used in its literal meaning of "to dawn." This conclusion is based first of all on the parallel statements of the other Gospels, which explicitly place the visit of the women to the tomb "at early dawn" (Luke 24:1; Mark 16:2; John 20:1). There is no hint in any of the Gospels that the women made two visits to the sepulchre, one on Saturday afternoon and one on Sunday morning. Thus we are justified in concluding that the "dawning" in Matthew is literal as in the other Gospels.

Sabbath’s Travel Restrictions. A second reason is suggested by the prevailing Jewish restrictions on Sabbath travel (Acts 1:12), which would have precluded any visit to the tomb on Sabbath afternoon from a distance greater than 2/3 of a mile. Since Mary Magdalene lived in Bethany, a distance of 2 miles from Jerusalem (Matt 21:1), and since she presumably spent the Sabbath at home (Luke 23:56), she could hardly have traveled to the tomb before the end of the Sabbath.

The same must be said for the evening after the close of the Sabbath. In the East people in general, let alone women, do not travel in the darkness of the night, particularly to a burial place "to see the sepulchre" (Matt 28:1). It is far more true to life for the women to have traveled from Bethany to Calvary early on Sunday morning, as indicated by the Gospels (Mark 16:2; Luke 24:1; John 20:1).

At Passover time the astronomical morning twilight began in the latitude of Jerusalem at about 4:00 a.m. and the sun rose at about 5:30 a.m. This means that if Mary Magdalene arose about the time it began to get light (John 20:1), and walked from Bethany to Christ’s sepulchre, she would have arrived by sunrise (Mark 16:1; John 20:1).

Other Difficulties. Several other difficulties arise if the Resurrection and the visit of the women to the tomb are placed "late on the Sabbath day." The many events which are described in Matthew 28:2-15 and attached to the time designated in verse 1 could hardly have taken place "late on a Sabbath day." For example, it is hard to believe that the risen Christ would tell the women on a late Sabbath afternoon, "Go and tell my brethren to go to Galilee" (Matt 28:10). It would have been against prevailing customs to start out on a trip late on a Sabbath afternoon.

Furthermore, it is difficult to see how the following events could have taken place on a late Sabbath afternoon: the guards going to the city to inform the chief priests about what had happened (v. 11); the chief priests assembling the Council to decide what action should be taken (v. 12); the Council paying the soldiers to fabricate the story of the stealing of Christ’s body by His disciples (vv. 12-13).

More decisive still is the instruction given to the soldiers by the chief priests: "Tell people, ‘His disciples came by night and stole him away while we were asleep" (v. 13). In view of the fact that the soldiers had been stationed at the sepulchre during the light hours of the Sabbath day (Matt 27:62-66), they could hardly have told the people on Saturday evening that the disciples stole Christ’s body by night, when no night had yet intervened between the beginning of their vigil and the Resurrection.

In the light of the above considerations on the language and context of Matthew 28:1, we conclude that this passage offers no support whatsoever to the view of a late Sabbath afternoon Resurrection and visit of the women to the sepulchre. The indications submitted have amply established that the plain sense of Matthew 28:1 is: "After the Sabbath, at dawn on the first day of the week" (NIV).

II. SUNRISE TO SUNRISE

A second possible solution to the apparent contradiction between the two time references found in Matthew 28:1 is suggested by the possibility that Matthew here used the sunrise-to-sunrise method of day reckoning. If Matthew used this method, for which there seems to be some support both in the Old and New Testament, then any apparent contradiction would be automatically resolved, because the end of the Sabbath would mark the dawning of the first day.

A host of scholars have for many years argued for the existence in Biblical times of two methods of reckoning the day: one from sunset to sunset and the other from sunrise to sunrise. The data evidencing the existence of the two methods will be examined in the following chapter. The study will show that the support for the sunrise-to-sunrise day reckoning, though less explicit than that from sunset to sunset, cannot be ignored.

Summary of Evidences. Five main types of evidences suggesting the existence of the sunrise reckoning in Bible times are generally presented. Each of these will be considered in the following chapter. At this point we shall briefly state them.

First, there are sacrificial laws which specify that the sacrifice must be eaten on the day upon which it was offered, with nothing left over until the morning. Such statements suggest that the morning marks the end of the previous day and the beginning of the new day.

Second, there is the Passover legislation of Exodus 12 which place